From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <VMIKHEEV(at)sectordata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WAL replay logic (was Re: [PERFORM] Mount options f |
Date: | 2003-02-18 19:15:25 |
Message-ID: | 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E32518782@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > > Added to TODO:
> > >
> > > * Allow WAL information to recover corrupted pg_controldata
> > >...
> > > > Using pg_control to get the checkpoint position
> speeds up the
> > > > recovery process, but to handle possible
> corruption of pg_control,
> > > > we should actually implement the reading of
> existing log segments
> > > > in reverse order -- newest to oldest -- in order
> to find the last
> > > > checkpoint. This has not been implemented, yet.
> >
> > So if you do this, do you still need to store that information in
> > pg_control at all?
Yes: to "speeds up the recovery process".
Vadim
_____________________________________________________
Sector Data, LLC, is not affiliated with Sector, Inc., or SIAC
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Keith Bottner | 2003-02-18 19:48:19 | Performance Baseline Script |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-02-18 19:08:16 | Re: WAL replay logic (was Re: [PERFORM] Mount options for |